Template:Did you know nominations/United News of India


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Victuallers (talk) 08:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

United News of India

 * ... that during The Emergency, the news agency United News of India was merged with three other news agencies to form a nationalized news agency Samachar, under the direct control of the government of India?


 * ALT1:... that the news agency United News of India had to use the rusted disused teleprinters of United Press of India after its formation?
 * ALT2:... that United News of India is the first and only news agency in the world to supply news in Urdu on the teleprinter?
 * Reviewed: No. This is my first nomination for DYK and I have less than 5 DYK credits, so may be exempted from review at this moment. I will try to review as I will learn about the same.
 * Comment: Source of the facts are placed in the references.

Created by Logical1004 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:03, 20 June 2015 (UTC).


 * Comment The first hook is very interesting and is the one that I would prefer used. So much of India's history has been molded by the emergency and Wikipedia's coverage of it is not good. This is a nice article.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  19:14, 21 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment : Any reviews? Logical1004 (talk) 12:24, 9 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol voting keep.svg Length is good, dates check out, QPQ not required, tone is reasonably neutral, and sources are plentiful. I'm taking close paraphrasing and sourcing on good faith as all the cited sources are largely offline but there are no obvious out-of-place phrases. I do question the assertion that in 1970 that they were "the first to give a full-time science correspondent in the field of science reportage" but not strongly enough to delay this nomination. I've given the text a light polish for grammar and formatting. I'm hopeful that the extra eyeballs that front page coverage of this subject will receive may further improve this promising article. - Dravecky (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)